Poopfeast420 @ Poopfeast420 @discuss.tchncs.de

https://kbin.social/u/Poopfeast420

---

Read more

Posts

2

Comments

279

Joined

2 yr. ago

If it passed in its current form, my fear is that it would effectively be an extra tax and burden just for choosing to make games instead of some other type of media, and I’m concerned investors would see it that way too, and move their financial support to these surer bets, ultimately harming individual game developers and lessening game releases.

But for most games, I don't think it would it be an extra burden? As an armchair developer, most games might do a DRM check online, which would have to get removed or emulated or something.

For multiplayer shooters, I don't know if dev hosted servers are somehow a lot easier to do, compared to dedicated servers of yore, even if they're just internal, and would get a public release when the game is EOL. Depending on how things are defined, a single player, offline mode against bots might also count and "just" the multiplayer aspect gets shut down.

Games that would have a harder time are probably MMOs or Live Service games. I don't know how those would get sold/made, if you can never shut down the game. Maybe those types of games would basically have to be rented or something, so it's explicitly clear you're not getting a perpetual license.

True, didn't think about games like this, but that's the case for every online-only game, even if the changes might not be as drastic as OW1 -> OW2. It's not like you can roll back a patch in FF14, Siege or Destiny and play on that version, if you don't like the direction the game is going.

I don't think a part of SKG is making sure all different patch versions of a game are available and playable, once the devs end support for a game.

BTW I'm not against SKG, I've signed the petition, but when people say this would keep companies from selling the game forever, kill yearly installments of some franchise, or would "force" devs to make old version of their favorite game available, that's not what SKG wants to do.

I mean, SKG is about keeping the game still playable, not buyable forever.

But I want to resell it to the same person for further profit

One of the biggest controversies at the start of all of this was Ubisoft pulling The Crew whilst pushing people to buy The Crew 2.

I know about The Crew, but it's not like Ubisoft had a Special Edition or something lined up that replaced the original game, and you had to buy it again. There was no reselling, the sequel is a different game.

Nothing in the SKG initiative is against Sequels, Remasters, Remakes, whatever. It's not even about keeping a game in stores forever. It isn't against yearly releases of Fifa, Madden, NBA 2k, that get removed after a few years, as long as you can still play your copy of Fifa 26 in twenty years.

No one’s forcing you to buy a remaster… unless they are because they revoke your right to play the original so it’s your only option.

That's the thing though, does this really happen? Usually games that get completely removed, that you can't even play anymore are multiplayer games, live service stuff, that are just so dead that nobody is even remotely interested in a remaster, so the game is just gone.

Not really what this is about.

They could even still keep doing that with Remasters, Remakes, Ports on a new Console, Special Editions, whatever.

Finished the Lies of P: Overture DLC. It was a mixed bag for me. A rough beginning, which got better in the second half, and I got back into the rhythm after not playing this game in a year.

Not sure how to feel about the final boss. The setup was alright, the fight itself not bad, but for me, it was just constantly blocking the 10-20 hit combos of the boss, then maybe get one hit in. This boss in particular, but also other fights, felt like they weren't made for a player like me, who beat the game once and then came back for the DLC.

Performance wise, this week I noticed a lot more frame drops, mainly when you move the camera. I think it's connected to small particles flying around, since in the epilogue, your base is just full of these tiny sparks, and fps just tanks. It would be unplayable, if you did more than just walk around for a minute or two. Otherwise, the drops weren't as bad, and they never caused a death or something, but it's definitely something the devs should look at.

I mean the former leads (or at least one of them) say the game was ready for Early Access, the publisher says it wasn't. This could be the deciding factor if the studio gets the bonus or not.

Although today the publisher said some previously leaked slides were real, that show how the potential EA release fell way behind schedule over the years and would have been pretty bare-bones and that a delay would have made sense.

Gacha rolls are like breeding right?

Yes. That's why I said nobody really knows at this point, except the people involved.

The leads allegedly also were looking to gain $225 Million dollars (supposedly 90% of a $250 Million bonus), so of course they are saying the game is ready.

Charlie Cleveland did say they were going to split the bonus with the team, but imma be honest, why not put that into writing? Why take that huge cut in the first place, and then trust that the leads are going to do the right thing.

I don't think at this point you can really be sure of anything. Since the former leads have said they've filed a lawsuit (but not for what they're suing), it'll most likely come out at one point.

My assumption is that Krafton expected the leads to put in 12 hour days 7 days a week to meet ridiculous expectations and the leads took some vacation time or something along those lines.

This is from the lead himself, on his movie production website:

I’m Charlie Cleveland and I’ve been designing video games for over 25 years. I founded Unknown Worlds and built games like Natural Selection, Natural Selection 2, Subnautica and Moonbreaker. I absolutely love making games but wanted to try something new.

At the end of 2023, I left San Francisco after almost 20 years and moved to Los Angeles to reset my life. Instead of taking it easy, I now find myself working on multiple film projects. It’s amazing how fast it’s all happening - being right in the thick of things makes it so much easier to meet like-minded people!

Also, according to this link, he's taking a break from making video games, for at least a couple of months now, before all this stuff was out.

It might not be as one-sided as you think. But right now it's he said, she said, so nobody really knows.

Is there any connection between the hardware your initial purchase was made on, and the hardware you would run that game on right now? You can buy games from your phone, or your Steam deck, or at the public library, or on your father’s Gateway. Maybe he means the game’s original system requirements, as listed “on the back of the box” so to speak.

I think it's more about if you don't upgrade your PC.

Say you bought a game on Steam, while Windows XP was current, then just kept that PC, didn't upgrade for whatever reason. Why would you, your game is running fine. But now Steam doesn't support Windows XP anymore or Windows 7 for that matter, even if the game itself would run on it, making Windows 10, eventually 11, then whatever in the future, effectively the minimum requirement to play your game. The dev isn't really at fault, because the game could technically still run on that OS, you just can't download it anymore.

I agree with him in that regard, that it these things suck, however few people are actually affected by this. I think there should be some sort of "Legacy Client", but then you have to deal with security. Just saying, connect your Windows 98 machine to the net for an occasional DRM check isn't really viable. Installers would be the obvious answer, but that's not what Steam does. Maybe Linux could be the answer, but I don't know if it could be basically the same at one point with kernel version requirements or something like that.

Started the Lies of P: Overture DLC. Rough beginning, getting back into the groove, some bad enemies, that culminated in an absolutely terrible boss fight. Just complete garbage.

You're stuck in a tiny arena, with a big ass monster, and a terrible camera. You constantly get shoved around, into the walls, clipping halfway into the boss, because of terrible hitboxes, just living life. Half the time I died and couldn't even see my character, so I had no idea what my mistake was. Did I mistime my block? Or maybe the last block sent me reeling, and I couldn't react in time? Or maybe I was just on the ground because the hit before that knocked me down? Nobody knows, not even the boss, because his face is inside the wall.

It's been getting better since then, the next two bosses weren't as bad, the second one might even be fun with a few tweaks, and the fourth (which I just beat last night) was actually pretty good. I hope it continues like this, and doesn't go back to the atrocious start.

In solo you’re fighting a boss intended for 3 players and if you die twice the game is over completely.

Ok, but what if...you just kill bosses in five hits, because they don't have any HP?

It's an overexaggeration of course, but the enemies definitely have a lot less HP than in coop, not even just 1/3 or whatever (seemingly).

Also, are the enemies designed for multiplayer, except in scaling? Everything I've seen looks like standard Fromsoft stuff, no weird abilities that just fuck over solo players.

From what I saw, solo is a lot easier than coop (streams of the game, not played it myself yet). Enemies have basically no HP, and you can predict what they do, just like in a normal Souls game. Also, you're not getting matched with randoms.

If you're playing with friends, sit in voice chat, that might get easier for you again.

I think the indie games genre is just a vibe, not if something is really independent or not.

Like nobody is calling Witcher or Cyberpunk an indie game, even though it didn't have an outside publisher. Conversely, most people would probably say Bastion or Journey are indie games, even though Warner and Sony published the games.

Ok? It was a temporary voice file that the devs forgot to remove or replace. And people immediately screamed that Blizzard is trying to sneak AI into the game.

Machine generated voices are also very standard as placeholders. I'm... kinda surprised nobody has slipped up on that post-AI panic

Diablo 4 had this recently, where an obviously Microsoft Sam like robot voice made it through, and a few people lost their minds.

Nope, the game is and will probably always be spammy. Everyone has unlimited ammo. I definitely prefer this btw.

There's map control of course, just not like arena shooters. Most maps have changing objectives, around which the fights happen.

Instead of more difficult weapons you're managing your abilities and cooldowns.

That's just the kind of game OW is.

I've been playing for about two months now, after a multi-year break from the game. Just casual, not competitive (although Stadium is classified as competitive). It's great.

Two bad things for me. Flex Queue means Tank, which sucks, because I'd like to play all roles, but now have to just queue DPS/Heal. Also, the matchmaker is shit, so most games are relatively one-sided (Quick Play and Stadium).